| | |
| | 3 August 2010 17:20 |
| | Hello Lene and Ernst!
Can I ask you a bridge, please? CC: Bamsa gamine |
| | 4 August 2010 00:18 |
| | "quod reperies thesauris"?
Lein, what do you mean by the words?
Why "quod" (shouldn't be "et" or sth similar?)?, why "thesauris" (shouldn't be accusative?)?
|
| | 4 August 2010 12:45 |
| LeinNumber of messages: 3389 | You may very well be right on both accounts
I tried to say 'search deep and you will find treasures'.
I think 'et' may be a better literal translation. I thought 'quod' might mean something more like 'so that' but I think I am making this unnecessarily complicated so please replace with 'et' if that works!
And 'thesauris' should most definitely be accusative! Silly me - how about 'thesauros'?
|
| | 4 August 2010 21:42 |
| | Why "thesauros" (plur.) and not "thesaurum" (sing.)? Is "skatten" a plural noun?
Moreover if you wanted to say "search deep" (I thought you was to say "search the deapth", because "profundum" can be a noun or an adjective, but never an adverb) you should type "in profundo". But I don't think it changes a meaning a lot, so you can leave it.
"quod" has many meanings:
conj.: the fact that, the point that; as to the fact that, whereas; because, on the ground that; why, on which account; with temporal clauses, since; as far as, to the extent that; introducing a fresh sentence, and, but, now, esp. foll. by si.
But I believe it doesn't suit for the sentence. |
| | 5 August 2010 00:37 |
| gamineNumber of messages: 4611 | Hi dear. It's a quite strange sentence:
Search deeply and you'll find the treasure
The requester wants this sentence to be written on a stone wall.
Hope this can help you. |
| | 5 August 2010 11:48 |
| LeinNumber of messages: 3389 | Oops, I did think this was plural (treasures). A mistake I seem to keep making with Danish |
| | 5 August 2010 20:11 |
| | Thank you Lene!
Now it seems to be good, dear Lein. I started the poll to be sure. |
| | 10 August 2010 23:18 |
| | Hello dear!
Can I ask you a help. I'm not sure of "profundum" in this sentence. Do you think it can be left like it is? The English bridge was given by Lene above. CC: Efylove |
| | 17 August 2010 19:15 |
| | Uhm, maybe "in profundo", as you have suggested, is better.
Sorry for the delay.
|
| | 17 August 2010 19:17 |
| LeinNumber of messages: 3389 | I'm fine with any changes (I can't edit at the moment as the poll is on). Thanks both |
| | 17 August 2010 21:10 |
| | hi all=)
thx a lot for helping me all. i just wanted to give a clue on what im looking for. its sort of a treasure hunt. it is a clue that will be written in a stone henge- its suposed to lead to a treasure that is buried in a well. so search deep (in the well) and you will find the treasure. hope it makes more sence what my meaning is now=))9 |
| | 18 August 2010 13:57 |
| | Don't worry, tbn999. We do our best here as always.
Hi Efee!
quaere --> quaerere
Maybe "quearere penitus" would convey the source better? |
| | 20 August 2010 15:01 |
| | Ok "penitus".
But why "quaerere"? Infinite? Or imperative 2nd person passive?
I think "quaere" (imperative 2nd person active) is correct.
|
| | 20 August 2010 16:03 |
| | Ooops! I mixed "quero" with verba deponentia! Yes, it was correct like Lein typed. Thank you, dear! |
| | 20 August 2010 16:09 |
| | |